A Discourse in Iconography by St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco
Iconography
began on the day our Lord Jesus Christ pressed a cloth to His face and
imprinted His divine-human image thereon. According to tradition, Luke the
Evangelist painted the image of the Mother of God; and, also according to
tradition, there still exist today many Icons which were painted by him. An
artist, he painted not only the first Icons of the Mother of God, but also
those of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul and, possibly, others which have not
come down to us.
Thus did
Iconography begin. Then it came to a halt for a time. Christianity was cruelly
persecuted: all that was reminiscent of Christ was destroyed and subjected to
ridicule. Thus, during the course of the persecutions, Iconography did not
develop, but Christians attempted to express in symbols what they wished to
convey. Christ was portrayed as the Good Shepherd, and also in the guise of
various personalities from pagan mythology. He was also depicted in the form of
a vine, an image hearkening back to the Lord's words: "I am the true
Vine.... ye are the branches" (St. John 15:1, 5). It was also accepted
practice to depict Christ in the form of a fish, because if one writes in Greek
"Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior" (Iesous Christos, Theou Hios,
Zoter) and then groups together the first letter of each word, one discovers
that one has written the Greek word Ichthys, "fish." And so,
Christians depicted a fish, thereby calling to mind these words which were
known to those who believed in the Savior. This also became known to the
pagans, and consequently the image of the fish was also held suspect.
When,
following the victory of Emperor Constantine the Great over Maxentius, freedom
was given to Christians, Christianity quickly transformed the Roman Empire and
replaced paganism. Then Iconography flourished with full force. We already see
directives concerning Iconography at the first ecumenical councils. In some
church hymns, which today are still frequently used, mention is also made of
Iconography.
Now what
are Icons? Icons are precisely the union between painting and those symbols and
works of art which replaced Icons during the time of persecution. The Icon is
not simply a representation, a portrait. In later times only has the bodily
been represented, but an Icon is still supposed to remind people of the
spiritual aspect of the person depicted.
Unfortunately,
this Orthodox movement as a whole started to collapse when Russia began to be
infiltrated by Western influence. In certain respects, Russia's acquaintance
with the European West was very beneficial. Many technical sciences and much
other useful knowledge came from the West. We know that Christianity has never
had any aversion to knowledge of that which originates outside itself. Basil
the Great, Gregory the Theologian and John Chrysostom studied in pagan
universities, and many writers, among whom were our spiritual authors and many
of the best theologians, were well acquainted with pagan writers. The Apostle
Paul himself cited quotations from pagan poets even in the Holy Scriptures.
Nevertheless, not all that was Western was good for Russia. It also wrought
horrible moral damage at that time, for the Russians began to accept, along
with useful knowledge, that which was alien to our Orthodox way of life, to our
Orthodox faith. The educated portion of society soon sundered themselves from
the life of the people and from the Orthodox Church, in which all was regulated
by ecclesiastical norms. Later, alien influence touched Iconography as well.
Images of the Western type began to appear, perhaps beautiful from an artistic
point of view, but completely lacking in sanctity, beautiful in the sense of
earthly beauty, but even scandalous at times, and devoid of spirituality. Such
were not Icons. They were distortions of Icons, exhibiting a lack of
comprehension of what an Icon actually is.
By St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco
